RandomFan

At least he seems happy to be here. That hasn't always been the case, right Evan Turner?

Yes. But a less than max contract can be structured with a descending scale where ~$30m is the first year with 5% decreases per year. I did the math a while back and it came out to around a total of $110m 4-year contract IIRC. That way we compensate for the lower BYC first year salary for trade purposes, but still lower the overall average value of the deal. Of course Ayton would have to agree to this contract, but that is the point of pointing out earlier that he really isn't being heavily pursued for a max at this time.

FINALLY! Yes, he's a great stretch 4. But he's also not a strong defender, which is extremely important for the stretch 4 that we need to synergize with a roster around Trae and a normal center, well pretty much any center. Being only an average defender is really, really, really a big deal. And yeah we can agree to disagree. But if they fit fine then I think we both can acknowledge we wouldn't have been hearing about problems of the roster fit for over 2 years now, and also the smoke regarding both the Hawks and JC looking for a better fit. Just sayin'.

Bird is just trying to get the last word in on you bro, don't fall for it!

I read it to mean the Hawks have multiple avenues to put assets in the pot to make a deal happen. I don't see anything even remotely concrete to suggest what combination of those assets should be pushed. I also don't see where Ayton getting $30m is guaranteed in this scenario. There always exists the option he has to take less than the max, especially since he doesn't have much of a market to strong arm a suitor with.

Justin is not a bum. Not even close. If he re-signs with us for another couple of years on a reasonable contract then I will be for it. But I hope people are prepared that Aaron isn't a point guard. He's a shooting guard trapped in a PG body. Health permitting, we will likely only ever see him on the floor alongside Murray, and never with Trae. I could see something like Trae, Murray, and Bogi splitting most of the minutes between the 1 and 2, with Aaron getting 5 to 10 minutes at the 2 alongside Murray at the 1. Still going to see a lot of Trae + Bogi minutes together.

Yes, I quoted Reddawg and was addressing his post when I said that. It's a multiple person response but they should be shown in order of quote and response. Is that not how it appears on your screen? But that's not what I'm saying. It's not about "saving money." It's about spending money where it matters the most, and more importantly not wasting money where it's not serving you best. You don't pay extra to put a 3000lb winch on a Ferrari because you are never taking it off-road. It would be a waste of money when you could spend that money on better tires that hug the road. We can't afford to be spending money for luxury items anymore, not if there is a better fit out there. These franchises aren't playing with unlimited monopoly money. I don't want him to be more of a focal point, not at all. What people are saying is on a team with Trae, if you can't put a center next to JC that is a stretch 5 on offense that also doesn't care about paint touches and is also a great rim protecting strong interior defender, then it is impossible to ever take full advantage of his strengths. That's it.

ATLANTA HAWKS The Hawks already pushed the chips all-in with the acquisition of Dejounte Murray, but could they be looming as a potential destination for Ayton? If you add up the pieces for the win-now Hawks, it makes a lot of sense. Adding Ayton into the Hawks’ ecosystem is a sure-fire bet to give this team legitimate NBA Finals aspirations. A new big three in Atlanta consisting of Young, Murray and Ayton would make for nightly fireworks on the court; plus, it’s a stable, All-Star-level foundation with youth that could grow together on the same timeline for years to come. Atlanta also stands out as a strong Ayton suitor because of its available assets, even after coughing up draft picks to the Spurs for Murray. Clint Capela is an obvious candidate to be moved in any Ayton deal due to his salary and position. Atlanta also has other salaries that can work in multi-team frameworks such as the often-rumored John Collins as well as Bogdan Bogdanovic. And don't forget about the Hawks' underrated core of young talent: De'Andre Hunter, Onyeka Okongwu, AJ Griffin and Jalen Johnson. It's unlikely that the Hawks would make Hunter or Okongwu available for Ayton, but what about their recent first-round pick in Griffin? That's where it gets interesting, because a piece like Griffin can help accelerate a potential three-team deal between Phoenix, Brooklyn and Atlanta where the end result ultimately lands Durant alongside Booker. The Hawks have extinguished most of their future assets for Murray, but they still have enough wiggle room to make another big splash. Ayton could be the final missing piece for Atlanta to become a real Finals competitor as early as next season. In addition, this would help the Suns land their ultimate prize.

@Dean Walker is that you? EDIT: also,

Agree with this. My feeling is if we avoid the LT this year it's not really Ressler lying about being willing to be a LT team in the past. I view it more as prudent use of going into the LT, just like what he said in his comments about it last year. He's willing to go into the tax for a contending team; and honestly with the addition of DJM we don't really know if that pushes us into that conversation. We all hope it does, but at this point it's not a safe bet. If we are able to add a 3rd star to this roster this offseason that would improve those chances of us being a contending team, then I think Ressler would have no problem in paying the LT. But if we stay mostly as-is while we are right at the LT threshold, then it makes business sense to stay out of the tax and see how the roster does this year before committing to the tax next year if the results are favorable. As our cap gurus have said repeatedly, the repeater tax is what teams want to desperately avoid paying.

Listen, we're largely in agreement on a lot of things here, there are just a few major sticking points we seem to be talking past each other. So lemme try to clarify my position. I'm not advocating for trading JC, especially not for a move that doesn't improve our roster (but the improvement doesn't have to be this year either, it could be as simple as improving the long-term health of the roster from multiple angles such as roster fit, salary cap allocation, etc...). John seems like a great person and a great teammate. He is a positive asset on this roster; he has value. We should definitely not be trying to trade him for peanuts or a salary dump, nor do I think we are or would. If we can't improve the roster by trading him then obviously the smart play is to simply bring him back: unless there is something going on behind the scenes where the relationship is so fractured it can't be repaired. However we have no concrete indication of that. Supes did point out Trae went to the front office and vouched for Capela, but emphasized that he didn't do the same for Collins. Who knows the reason or how important that actually is in the grand scheme of things, but it doesn't seem like a nothing-burger. What I AM doing is pushing back on the narrative some people seem to have that there is no justifiable reason to trade him, or that there is no fire where there is plenty of smoke. Some people don't even seem to want to acknowledge the smoke. There is plenty of reason to consider trading John, as noted in my earlier post about how difficult it is to field a team around him that takes FULL advantage of his strengths. Not where he can still be useful, but where a team gets to use his FULL skillset to maximize your return on investment. Especially when that conflicts with the team your need around your superstar, when JC isn't anywhere close to a star player himself. You build around your superstar, not role players. Let's talk about when you said this: "Show me a direct quote from JC or his camp about what he wants to do. Doesn’t exist. It’s all the same rumor being recycled over and over." We'll get back to that. You can't in one post criticise me for believing what I hear and then in the next post say, "But Brooklyn wants to keep Simmons, Suns want Clint for Ayton, and KD, yeah." Those aren't direct quotes from those players or their representatives, nor their teams. You know as well as I do we aren't going to get direct quotes about any of this at this time of the year. We only know about most of what we discuss here due to our three insiders, and occasionally some nuggets from reporters. Such as this from Kirschner in The Athletic: “He’s done in Atlanta,” a source close to Collins said. Or the multiple other reporters that stated even after the Murray trade the Hawks still are trying to trade JC. Again, I'm not pushing for him to be traded, but I'm not going to pretend there isn't a lot of smoke either. The prototype for a 4 alongside Trae, especially paired with a traditional non-stretch 5, is at a minimum an excellent interior defender that can also step out on the perimeter and hold up against at least most small forward types, while being at least a league average 3 pt shooter, decent rebounder, screen setting, and ball hand offs. That's the bare minimum prototype. That type of player should probably cost a team somewhere between $10m to $15m. We are paying John $23.5m, and he doesn't even meet all the minimum requirements we need from the position. In addition, it helps even more if that player can ball switch 1 thru 4, and also provide weakside rim protection. The price would go up. Going further would be post-up production, passing, and/or ball handling/creation. The price would go up again. But the absolute least desirable skill for a 4 in our scenario is PnR. That is the job of the 5, who really has no other value on offense other than rebounding and putbacks. That is not to say it is a useless skill for a 4: obviously it is still helpful. But it is not ideal. And we are paying top dollar for that skill when we can't maximize its use, so our return on investment is not good. And any PnR chances we take away from Clint to give to JC also reduces our return on Clint's contract. Talking about what JC still gets done in our offense or how efficient our offense was last year does not change the fact that it is not an ideal return on our investment or that JC's skills aren't being wasted to some extent. In a perfect world We would be paying about $13m for a 4 that fits our roster better and could then use that extra ~$10m to improve the roster elsewhere. But this isn't a perfect world so we do the best with what we've got. If that means keeping JC then I'm 100% fine with that; that is a decision above my paygrade. Let's just please stop pretending JC here is a great fit or great value on his contract. And let's also stop missing the point when those of us point these things out and talk about potential trade partners, moves, etc... This is after all a message board where people engage in mental masturbation as a daily ritual. Agree with a lot of this except for trading Capela instead of Collins if it comes down to one of them having to go. Capela is easily the obvious choice to stay in that scenario. He's a more typical prototype for his position that doesn't have to be square pegged into a round hole, unlike Collins. Unfortunately the Huerter move was necessary for the long-term health of the roster. We can't afford to have $34m per year tied up in backups now that we no longer have most of our important players on rookie-scale contracts. Bogi would have been the smarter trade option, except he decided to have knee issues at the worst possible time in regards to his trade value. We are now at the stage of our rebuild where some players will have to be prioritized over others as far as who gets paid and who gets moved out. The salary cap sucks and this is clearly a talent downgrade in the short-term. But this move helps us keep other players on the roster long-term and got us more backup depth on more reasonable contracts in the short-term. My inclination is to disagree with this, but I will say I agree if it's from the viewpoint of what I said above: (but the improvement doesn't have to be this year either, it could be as simple as improving the long-term health of the roster from multiple angles such as roster fit, salary cap allocation, etc...) For example, if we traded for a $10 to $15m per year for a 4 or 5 less talented player that fits our roster better than JC, or at least most of the prototype skills, along with a future pick or other asset then I would 100% call that an improvement. Due primarily to what I would consider to be better asset allocation under the salary cap going forward. While we might suffer an initial talent downgrade, the roster is better setup for success due to having a player that probably provides better team synergy on the floor (even with lower statistical numbers) while allowing you to spend money on other roster upgrades elsewhere. I guess most people would not agree it would be an improvement because they would only be looking at the immediate talent downgrade from JC to the other player. So it really comes down to how people define improvement.

I tried to save you guys last Saturday from having to listen to the pod when I posted this with it, haha.

Yep, the biggest difference here is we are basically sacrificing Kevin's secondary ball handling and creation for improved defense. Well, and also about a decade of age, lol. But also a much cheaper price, which is suitable since Justin is 100% a bench player where Kevin was too often called on to start. We all would have much rather traded Bogi and kept Kev, but Bogi picked bad timing to have knee issues that has tanked his trade value. Let's hope he has a tremendous bounceback season and pushes his trade value back up for next offseason, or even midseason this year.

LOL. Problems don't exist, eh? Sure. The Hawks are trying to trade him; and JC's camp has told reporters he's done in ATL and ready to move to an offense with more ball movement. But sure, let's act like we are just pulling stuff from our buttocks. Or better yet

Not gonna lie, that thought did cross my mind too, lol. I don't really buy it because we are already pushing the luxury tax, but it definitely crossed my mind.

Seems this needs a re-post.

Some seriously wrong JC takes being dropped in here, but OK.

Ummm, you don't blame a traditional center for filing his role that displaces a non-traditional PF. As was posted here previously, John is a misfit of skills for his position which makes it difficult to put players around him to maximize his strengths. There is nobody to "blame" those are just the cold hard facts.

Unless they are dead set on moving him before the season, it would seem to make more sense to keep him on the roster until the trade deadline in the hopes he could increase his trade value. In addition to hopefully another attractive player hits the trade market by then. While still possible, I would be fairly surprised to see JC finish the season with us though.

Yeah. On a roster with Trae is just a tough fit for a player like Mays. He'd be an easier fit in a rotation somewhere like the Bucks.

Very good article on expected wins and how much each win should cost in the NBA. Based on some advanced stats that make Trae look ridiculously good. https://www.truehoop.com/p/the-dollar-value-of-a-winning-nba

Or, and hear me out, it could be...not...that. It could be something other than the reason you try and assign in your mind to every single thing someone posts.